Monday, February 4, 2013

Hagel a Beneficiary of Selfish Axe-Grinders

Whassup with the support for Chuck Hagel, an embarrassing hack (to call him mediocre is to insult the those who manage to scale the middles and actually achieve mediocrity), a chap who's clearly out of his depth, a political operative who possesses neither the skills nor the smarts to be handed the keys to the Pentagon? As Michael Rubin 'splains, the defense of Hagel says more about the defenders than it does about the chap they're defending. Hagel champions, says Rubin, have a pronounced animus toward a certain group that has clouded their judgment such that they have placed their own interests ahead of those of the nation:

During the Cold War, there were communists, anti-communists, and anti-anti-communists who were much less concerned about the reality of the Soviet Union than about stymying those who were opposed to Moscow. Likewise, in the aftermath of 9/11, there were terrorists, anti-terrorists and, within progressive circles, anti-anti-terrorists who were more consumed with Bush Derangement Syndrome than with Hamas, Hezbollah, and al-Qaeda. Their rhetoric was marked by sky-is-falling hyperbole regarding Gitmo, the Patriot Act, and Dick Cheney.

Much of Hagel’s support is rooted in the same trend. Many of those signing letters and penning op-eds supporting Hagel make no secret that their concern is less Hagel than an obsession about neoconservatives. Colin Powell, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Peter Beinart, and the good folks at Think Progress may cast aside Hagel’s Neanderthal approach to social issues and they may genuinely think that there is more room for diplomacy with Tehran. There are many competent Democrats and even some Republicans who might agree with them. But to rally around Chuck Hagel was to embrace an incompetence that does not belong in the Pentagon—or at the top of any executive agency—at such troubled times. No one should sacrifice U.S. national security because they have a political axe to grind.